Posted
by
CmdrTacoon Tuesday October 19, 2010 @03:17PM
from the battle-of-the-billions dept.

Ponca City writes "Steve Jobs doesn't usually make a guest appearance on Apple's post-earnings conference calls with analysts, but this time he made an exception, attacking Google for marketing its operating system as 'open' versus Apple's 'closed' iOS. 'Google loves to characterize Android as "open" and iOS and iPhone as "closed." We find this a bit disingenuous, and clouding the real difference between our two approaches,' said Jobs. 'Android is very fragmented. Many Android [manufacturers], including the two largest, HTC and Motorola, install proprietary user interfaces to differentiate themselves from the commodity Android experience. The user's left to figure it out. Compare this to iPhone, where every handset works the same.' Jobs stated that the real debate is between 'fragmented versus integrated' and which is better for the consumer. 'When selling to users who want their devices to just work, we believe integrated will trump fragmented every time. And we also think our developers can be more innovative if they can target a singular platform rather than a hundred variants.' Jobs also criticized the Android Marketplace, pointing out that there are at least three other app stores being launched by vendors, causing confusion for users and work for developers. 'This is gonna be a mess for both users and developers,' Jobs said. 'Contrast this with Apple's integrated App Store, which offers users the easiest-to-use, largest app store in the world, preloaded on every iPhone.'"

Both sides (as well as Windows and MacOS desktops) need to learn that it is not acceptable to lock me out of my own device.... under any circumstance.It is not acceptable to encrypt any communication in a way that *** I *** as the owner of the device am refused from seeing what is sent. In other words, my device shall not be used to keep me out of the loop. Trust is between me and my device and me and any company I choose to deal with. Not between the company and my device.

Sadly the US Congress (and possibly the EU Parliament) disagrees with you.

They've passed numerous laws that say device makers can encrypt data, in order to prevent the user from violated (possibly) copyrighted material. VCRs did it first, then DVD players, then DVRs, next cable/dish systems, and now computers and cellphones.

Yes, but it's a very pretty straightjacket. It's the kind of straightjacket you can wear into a coffeehouse and let everyone know "I'm no poseur." It's not very warm, but you'll be smug as a bug in the warm self-satisfaction that comes with knowing you're better than everyone else.

Jobs also criticized the Android Marketplace, pointing out that there are at least three other app stores being launched by vendors, causing confusion for users and work for developers. "This is gonna be a mess for both users and developers,"

Yes, because people have proven that having more than one drug store, supermarket, or fast food chain inevitably disorients them and fouls up their lives. Oh, wait.

I really do like my Apple products, but not for the reasons Jobs pushes; more like in spite of his ideas. I'd love another store, particularly one where Jobs Judeo-Christian mores aren't pushed upon me; or, conversely, if Apple's store stopped insisting that apps have to work they way they think they should, or that apps "can't duplicate functionality." I'm hugely fond my my iPad, but the idea that it would be less useful to me if there were more than one app store available to me... that's just wrong.

It is all because his argument isn't about the consumer in actuality, it's about his revenue stream. A guaranteed 30% from every single app sold? Imagine if MS got that for every Windows App? Even if the customer requests a refund, they get to keep it, that since 100% comes out of the developer's pocket. And they get approval, so they can push their moral choices on everyone else, that's just a bonus.

I welcome all of this simply because the more people like him push, the more ordinary people start to wake up and push back. Revolutions just don't happen in places where the masses aren't really pissed off. Coups, maybe, but not full fledged revolutions. And we are overdue for one right about now.

Even having said that, this is still way too early for one, I think. But it's coming.

Yes, because people have proven that having more than one drug store, supermarket, or fast food chain inevitably disorients them and fouls up their lives. Oh, wait.

I have only one Google Marketplace on my phone but the prices are in different world currencies. I have more than one drug store, supermarket, and fast food chain near me most of the time, and they ALWAYS give their prices in my LOCAL currency. Apple's App Store is the same way.

Google's Marketplace needs more work before it can approach the user experience given by Apple's App Store.

The last time I looked at the market on 2.2, it showed everything in ~ USD amounts.

Wrong. Buddists don't have a single line in their patter that tells people outside their faith that sex is something to be ashamed of, hidden away, . That's really a Jewish / Christian problem, both the attitude itself, and the attempt to enforce it upon others.

No, that's not really it. I listend to the conference call, and while he clearly had the "our stuff is the best message" (any CEO that doesn't spout that message should be fired) it was clear that Apple sees Android and iOS as the two major players, and that Apple clearly understands that there is a large group of people that want total control over there device, and for them there is Android.

Jobs was only trying to change the subject here. The subject was open vs. non-open platform. Jobs quickly turned the conversation to "Android is very fragmented", which does not speak about the topic of open vs. closed. It really shows how scared he is of Android, because he can't talk his way out of the fact that the iPhone is one of the most heavily restricted software/hardware platforms in the world. The conversation isn't really about 'fragmented vs. integrated' - users don't care, but they do care when they can't run software they want to run, and that is where Jobs is trying to change the subject.

I have a droid and i really don't care how fragmented the android market is. I got to pick the phone i liked. and *my* droid - the single instance of the phone - is not fragmented. it works the same every day of the week. so, as a user, i don't really care how fragmented the market is. as a developer i do care - but Jobs, trying to frame it as something a user would care - "every phone works the same" - how is that a benefit for a user?

Most cell phone users have a two year contract, meaning they only upgrade their phones every two years. I had a T-Mobile G1 and less than a year after its introduction it was obsolete for anyone but the hackers because even though the phone COULD run higher versions of this "open" Android, it was abandoned because frankly no one makes any money in free upgrades.

I've really only seen like, 1 or 2 Android handsets have more than one point release upgrade and with the rate of Android releases that's just asin

also, apple is a hypocrite. They insist that a Mac and PC are two different things entirely! To stay in line with that line of thinking Jobs should just refer to other phones as just phones and his is the iPhone.

Android tends to be more popular with really geeky folks while the iPhone tends to be more popular with people that want their experience ready to go out of the box.

I have both, so let's see.

Android phone: turn on, type in Google account name and password (old or new), and everything works and stays in sync.

iPhone: turn on, and... then it gets complicated. You definitely need a desktop at some point, but then you have to decide... Do you want to sync with Google? That's complicated, you need to set up mail and an Exchange account. Do you sync with your desktop? On Mac, it sort-of syncs with the built-in applications (but not much else). On Windows, it supposedly syncs with Outlook. If you use both a desktop and a laptop, things get even more complicated.

Seems pretty clear which is better for "people who want their experience ready to go out of the box": get an Android phone and use Google's online apps. Apple's ecosystem is a complicated mess in comparison.

If you use both a desktop and a laptop, things get even more complicated.

One thing that totally pulled me off the whole "iOS experience" is when I configured my newly purchased iPad using my netbook, and synced up some stuff (e.g. books) with it that way.

Side note - why I can't just drag & drop books onto it, and have to go around by first importing them into iTunes and then force-syncing them, is beyond me, but whatever...

Now I plug iPad into my desktop PC, and it tells me to GTFO because it's already set up to sync with a different computer. Apparently, I can change it to sync with the desktop, but doing so will delete all books I've previously synced from the netbook. What the fuck?

Overall, the whole scheme with iTunes seems very convoluted, and not just to me - my mother, for whom that iPad was actually bought, also finds it counter-intuitive, and she's very much an inexperienced user when it comes to anything related to computers. Still, she readily understood the concept of dragging documents to and from a USB stick with a mouse, and was thoroughly confused by the fact that she can't do the same with iPad (and that it doesn't even appear under "Computer" in the same way her music player and camera do).

Android: I did a factory wipe of my phone. Android automatically downloaded my phones settings, extensive contact list etc from my Google account, including re-downloading apps from the market. My photos, videos were untouched on the SD card and automatically picked up by the gallery app. If I lost my cellphone I could equally recover all my personal data. Thank you Google for

iPhone: My friend did a full reset of his iPhone, it prompted him "Do you want to back up your iPhone?" he did this. While it backed up his settings. It did not back up his Apps nor his thousands of photos from recent holidays.
Needless to say he was distraught and a bit like "So tell me about this Android thing?". Apple gets alot right, but gets other things catastrophically wrong.

Frankly I have heard so many stories like this and I've never had a single problem with my Android phones. In situations like this it's saved my bacon by respecting my data, and the completely painless syncing to Google is a delight. Every non-geek I know who's bought an Android is utterly happy.

In general, Apple pays a lot of attention to things that it wants to matter to you. If that's not the same as what actually matters to you, then things can get a little rough.

For example, it's really easy to download the latest episode of the most popular TV series in iTunes, or to buy the latest top 40 hits. It's a lousy system for finding obscure stuff, even if its in the store; it keeps trying steer you back in the herd.

It's not all that hard to get an iPod touch synching with Google Mail. It's imposs

Are you sure your friend backed up his iPhone? I recently did what you described, and everything was restored without a problem (by the way, even if you delete a program on your phone it is still kept in iTunes. You can simply re-check it and the app will install next time you sync).

As far as syncing things like contacts and calendars there is nothing that compares to mobile me. Data on all of my ios devices and macs (I have 5 devices to keep sync - iPhone iPad, home iMac, laptop and work Mac) syncs instantly. No need to even tell it what to do beyond entering my username and password. I've never seen any service/app combination from either Microsoft or Google that comes even close in that arena.

I've never really been interested in storing my documents on a remote webserver so google's apps don't really hold any interest for me.

Android provides choice. There are many different models out there, some with keyboards, some with fancy organic screens, all kinds of features.

With iPhone, your choices are.... how much memory do you want. Wow.. thanks for understanding exactly what I want in a phone Steve. But your ESP is off, I like using memory cards and having accessible batteries and keyboards.

The rest of the crap you talked about being the 'strength' of Apple doesn't mean diddly squat. My HTC phone worked out of the box, always has. It has never frozen up. I've never been 'confused' about apps.

It's a short hand for "install the build somewhere". Something which many in the latest crop of Android devices aren't too friendly about. If Google really wanted to equate Android with "open", they'd stop allowing the use of the Android trademark by manufacturers and carriers who lock down devices that way...

But the openness doesn't come from the handset itself. Unless you buy direct from a manufacturer, the handsets will be locked down to the specifications of whichever service provider you bought it from.

Androids openness comes from the distribution of the platform. Once you do root you have an incredible amount of options and level of freedom on an Android device. Much more AFAIK than on any iOS device.

The tweet is FUD... He missed the most important part.. How do you install this on a Droid or most otherAndroid devices?

If you are compiling your own operating systems, maybe you should get a developer phone? You can install anything you want on those.

You need to root it just like you do to jailbreak a iPhone.

That's FUD. If your phone is locked down by your carrier or manufacturer, yes you'd need to root it. However, that's where similarities stop - i.e. try compiling your own version of iOS - that's right, you can't, it's NOT open source. That's the difference.

Android devices are far from open.

Most are locked down. Dev phones are not. Most that are locked down are easily rooted.

The big difference, again, is the operating system, not a device. Anyone - i.e. any startup tech company - can take Android source code and start making and selling their own cool devices based on it. That's the advantage of it being open source.

How is one supposed to use Android without the phone? You can't evaluate Android independent of its use on a particular piece of hardware.

the real evil is the phone companies.

And the distribution and marketing model of Android guarantees the carrier and phone manufacturer the ability to do whatever they please. Android strikes a blow for software freedom while grievously wounding network freedom. If you are a tinkerer the you'll benefit from the open OS, Google and Motorola certainly do, they get free bugfixes from users all over the world! But if you are a non-hacking end user Android is just another carrier and manufacturer straight-jacket. Android is a phone company's handmaiden.

Granted, most of these have proprietary overlays, but it doesn't make the OS itself any less open.

What good is open if it's just a line of bash(1)? Software openness is supposed to benefit everyone, not just the companies that sell you their paint-by-numbers no-source-available iterations of it. It's not like any of these products are any cheaper to the end user because the OS is open, or the choice in applications isn't really all that better because it's open. And you're really evading the main point, that this is an OS for the exploitation of vast untapped smartphone markets. People want mobile internet, and Android is happy to give it to them on the carrier's terms. Apple at least had the good sense to see the cellular networks as adversaries, and to prevent their interference in the transaction between the hardware vendor and the end user. But Android is obsequious to their will -- the OHA is little more than a proxy for cellular network providers and commodity handset manufacturers.

This is the pursuit of "open software" as a marketing bullet-point, and not as a thoroughgoing commitment to the freedom of users to do "what they want" with "their phone." Rubin's tweet really encapsulates Google's attitude toward openness. What he left out was:

if you understood what this meant, share the lolz on #android. Otherwise RTFS, n00b; open is wasted on you.

Typical elite geek attitude that only people who know how to hack are entitled to the fullest benefits of computing.

For now, iOS lets me do what I need to do without getting in the way or making me find the right libraries or compile anything.

Honestly, I'm not sure what you're talking about. I have never had to reinstall an app other than during an update for that app. When my DROID updated Android, everything came back up. I have developed Android applications, the SDK is a just a zip that works in Linux, Windows even Mac. And you just unzip it and use the emulator and SDK that comes with it. Awhile ago, I tried to code iPhone apps but given that I don't have a Mac -- no luck!

When I spend time compiling software for the iOS, I want it to do something new and perhaps make some money while doing it.

Wow. Then perhaps you'd like to discuss the fees you had to pay in order to develop something for the iPhone? Are you enrolled in the iOS developer program? I put together the machine I develop on and it was quite inexpensive. And if I wanted to distribute my apps on Android Market I'm not aware of any fee or approval BS that comes with Apple's market. Do some reading [wikipedia.org]:

To run an application on the iPhone, the application needs to be signed. This signed certificate is only granted by Apple after the developer has first developed the software through either the US$99/year Standard package or the US$299/year Enterprise package with the iPhone SDK.

Good luck "making a bit of money" when you're already negative from the get go!

Really, your comment reads like something written by someone who is confusing the customer with the developer and has never tried coding an Android app. You're correct that git and make don't mean anything to a customer but it does if you consider that developers have to embrace the platform before the customer has an apps to use!

Short run: make your money on iPhone. Long run: Android wins out. Trust me on this one.

I can't tell if you're confused or trolling... I read your blog so I know you're not stupid.

The problem with this as it relates to the market is that a vanishingly small percentage of the population would even know what cd means, much less make. These markets serve people that want to get stuff done (email, phone, text, post to websites/blogs/etc...) and are not remotely interested in using the device to geek out on it. They use the devices that allow them to do what they want while staying out of the way. My principle complaint of the Android devices when I had one was that a simple OS update meant reinstalling all of my apps! Why in the world would someone allow that to be shipped? I swore off Android at that point, but may look at it again some time in the future.

For now, iOS lets me do what I need to do without getting in the way or making me find the right libraries or compile anything. When I spend time compiling software for the iOS, I want it to do something new and perhaps make some money while doing it.

I have an HTC Evo since the day it was released. Since then, I've been through a few minor updates and a major release (Froyo). I have never had to reinstall apps and I've never had to worry about libraries or compiling anything at all. For that matter, I've never known anyone to have to compile anything for Android with the exception of a developer I know.

So, I don't know what phone or Android version you're running, but it can't be anything recent. I think your issues could be compared with someone bashing Ubuntu because way back when they ran Linux, they had to compile everything from source.

As for Apple, I have two iPod Touch units, one 3rd Gen and one 4th Gen. I've had to reinstall different software apps several times and had some just stop working after a time (don't know if an update caused the problems). Of course, when something stops working on the iPod/Phone, there's really nothing you can do except uninstall and reinstall and see if that fixes your issue. Other than that, well, just uninstall and hope you can get your money back if it's an app you paid for. Those issues were with the 3rd Gen. I can't really speak for the 4th Gen as it only worked for a couple of days before I had to send it back to Apple. Apple service was great, but I shouldn't of had to send the damn thing back in the first place. I didn't have to pay any money for the repair, but it did cost me several hours trying to figure out what was wrong + a trip to the UPS store to have it shipped back to Apple.

It's merely lying to save face with the moronic investors during a "not-as-good-as-we-thought" quarter. Let's fix those awful quotes and inject some truthiness into them:

"When selling to users who want their devices not to suck, we believe a walled garden will be less confusing than and open one, every time. And we also think our developers can be more innovative if they can target a singular platform in our choice of development environment, rather than choose their own. And not piss us off with any of t

He probably meant in in the same way at his last press conference he said the iPod Touch was the largest mobile gaming platform on the planet having sold double the number of mobile gaming devices as Sony and Nintendo put together. Except, there's about 300 million Nintendo DS' and PSPs out there, but only 30 million iPod touches.

Then there was the one about 275,000 iPhone activations per day on average, which would equate to 100 million a year, except even their best iPhone quarter so far they've only shif

The difference is that with most Android installations (and indeed, all to my knowledge, but there may be some I haven't heard of), you can install what you want right off the bat. If you don't like the content available on the Android Market, you can check the box to allow you to install non-Market apps. There is absolutely no reason Apple couldn't do this, while still preserve their "user experience".

Where did GP say that all android is no longer open? I can believe that AT&T is going to do everything they can to lock android down (they don't want anyone tethering without paying the extra fee). I am currently an iPhone user, but am dissatisfied and may go back to using "just a phone" while I wait for a better alternative. To me it has little to do with the OS and everything to do with carrier lockouts. I do like rolling my own ringtones, but Apple has not embraced that, and it's a multi step pro

Really? So, when was the last time you were able to actually, I dunno, make some changes to the Android kernel and then install it back on your Evo without first voiding your warranty by jailbreaking it?

I'm a big FOSS fan (typing this on an Ubuntu box) but the whole "I can see the source" thing rings hollow for me.

Every day people use things they don't have the source to. From the firmware in the alarm clock that wakes them up to the BIOS in their computers to the code running the microwave oven. The TV cable box firmware (heck, the TV itself!), alarm system firmware, automobile computer firmware, etc.

Android takes the title of open for a number of reasons, including the fact that it's open source (not the crap manufacturers put on top, but Google's Android,) the market is more open, and the market isn't the only show in town. If Jobs wants to attack specific bad implementations that layer closed crap on top, I'll applaud him -- but you can't generalize that to every phone.

By your 1% definition, even gNewSense wouldn't be open if you put it in front of my grandmother.

And if the users don't do anything beyond use the phone more or less as-is - customizing the pre-packaged frontend, installing approved apps from the approved app store - is it really open, or just another brand of the same thing iOS is?

When you need (or want) something to be open and it's not, that's bad. When you don't need something to be open, but it is anyway, that's good. I don't know why you consider these equivalent. (Whether there are times you would want it not to be open is an argument for elsewhere)

Replace "Open" by "Within range of a fire department." Some people never use the fire department, but as long as they can be reached, then if they ever need it, it's there. If they're not in range, and they need a fire truck, SOL.

Frankly, I agree that the closing off of handsets is stupid, but if assuages corporate fears, then they'll continue to make that decision. But, all it takes is one device--competently made and on the right network. If there's just one, then the option is still available to you.

Apple's explanation was that the content "ridicules public figures". Yes, I know that this guy's app was allowed after he won his Pulitzer, but what about all of the apps that aren't backed by Pulitzers?

People's phones and tablets are becoming the medium through which they experience the world, so this sort of censorship does matter.

If you buy an Android phone you get a good, straightforward user experience without having to do any kind of hacking on it. You have an easy to use app market with lots of apps which is loosely monitored to make sure it doesn't have malware (without having draconian yet poorly defined rules about what's acceptable and what's not). It comes with some apps that almost everyone is going to want, and has a simple mechanism for finding more apps to fit your needs. The experience you get with an out of the box Android phone is similar to what you get with an out of the box iPhone.

If you're happy with that experience, you're in good shape. There's nothing else you need to do. With iOS, if you're unhappy with that experience you're pretty much out of luck. With Android, the operating system will step out of your way. You have the opportunity to screw things up, but you also have the ability to do things the phone manufacturer never imagined (or perhaps, doesn't approve of).

"When selling to users who want their devices to just work, we believe integrated will trump fragmented every time. And we also think our developers can be more innovative if they can target a singular platform rather than a hundred variants."

Integrated vs fragmented. He's just trying to redefine the terms in his favor.

Integrated vs fragmented. He's just trying to redefine the terms in his favor.

Open > Closed

vs

Integrated > Fragmented

Well done Steve.

It all depends on who is buying, as he said: "When selling to users who want their devices to just work"

If you are a grandma that just got such a device, you will be on the "users who want their devices just to work" category. If you read slashdot, you are likely not in that category and instead in the "i want to tweak this thing to no end" category, in that case, obviously iOS devices are not for you.

Yeah, but to be fair one of his points was that the current terms were created by what he views as the open source community. The terms were already defined to put his product in a bad light. Of course he is trying to redefine terms in the debate, the current terms are unfair.

His main point, about Android not in fact being an open community, was really spot on. Android might be "open" as in FOSS, but most of the community is definitely not able to take advantage of Android's openness.

Honestly, most of the "problems" with Android I actually consider to be strengths. Now the "fragmented" argument, yes, I can see where that can hurt in the long run, but then again, PC's are quite fragmented yet which has a larger hold after all these years, Apple or PC?

If Google actually made and sold a reasonably competitive phone then they could point to it and say "hey, here's the hardware that runs the software. You can do whatever you want with it." That's open.

What they really have is some software that is technically open, but there's no hardware to run it on. Which makes Android phones about as open as a router that runs Linux and distributes the code but doesn't give you any way to install your changes

The thing you're overlooking is that there is one operating system that binds together all of those 'fragmented' hardware components from multiple manufacturers: Windows, with a consistent user interface.

What we're seeing in the Android space is much more akin to the Linux desktop model: it's all "linux" but it looks and feels different from device to device, because manufacturers insist on rolling their own interfaces (KDE, Gnome, et. al.), and multiple interfaces in the mind of a consumer = "totally dif

Honestly, most of the "problems" with Android I actually consider to be strengths. Now the "fragmented" argument, yes, I can see where that can hurt in the long run, but then again, PC's are quite fragmented yet which has a larger hold after all these years, Apple or PC?

PC fragmentation is in hardware, Android fragmentation is in Software, the OS it self. The dominant PC OS is Windows which, what ever else you can say about Microsoft, does an amazing job at providing a consistent (and IMHO crappy, but still consistent) software user experience across an amazing and bewildering array of often depressingly low quality PC hardware. Stability sometimes suffers mostly due to crappy hardware but the consistency of the user experience is the same. MS has also done a fairly decent

Wow, what an overheated headline. Jobs did not "lash out". He gave very reasoned response and delineated the significant differences in the philosophy and design of the 2 platforms. It wasnt an angry rant by any means.

Wow, what an overheated headline. Jobs did not "lash out". He gave very reasoned response and delineated the significant differences in the philosophy and design of the 2 platforms. It wasnt an angry rant by any means.

You must own an iPhone:).

But seriously, the idea that "integrated" gives the app developer the ability to be more innovative is simply not true when the reality is Apple is the gatekeeper and any app they don't like they just remove from their "integrated" marketplace. His response was not reasoned, it was a marketing ploy. A "reasoned response" would be "We at Apple feel like the users get a better experience when we have full control over what you can and can't do with a device. Since most people a

A "reasoned response" would be "We at Apple feel like the users get a better experience when we have full control over what you can and can't do with a device. Since most people are idiots, the average user is happier when we make decisions for them. True freedom results in a worse experience, so we don't believe in freedom." At least that would be intellectually honest.

Thats a reasoned response, but certainly not an intellectually honest one.

Apple is playing gatekeeper because Apple is protecting its other interests. You paid half a grand for that iPhone, but thats not enough. They also want to nickel and dime you on the content you consume. Sure, there are some free apps, and some free music, and some free videos.. but you are still in their store getting it.

Sometime in the late 80s I was watching the news and they kept using the term "fiery car crash" versus "traffic accident" in one news story. It literally went like this:

"This just in, a fiery car crash on I-95 has stopped traffic in both directions for miles. The cause of the fiery car crash is as yet unknown. Tom is live at the scene. Tom, what can you tell us about the fiery car crash?"

So it's fine that they're letting us know that it's "fiery" and all, but that was my first taste of true news sensationalism taking to an idiotic degree. It's continued ever since. And don't lash out at me to tell me it's always been like this. Even if you're just explaining your experience.;-)

Tired all of those choices that TWO things can offer? Confused by those floaty things that enter your vision and then move away when you try to focus on them? Scared by things that don't outright hug you?

I want a phone that will let me install whatever app I choose to install regardless of who made it or what store sold it. For me, Android and BlackBerry work best. For the not-so-techy or those who don't care if they're in a walled garden, an iOS device will suit them just fine.

Yeah, right. iOS is about as fragmented as Android is. And the people I've talked to with iPhones older than version 4 are having real troubled with the latest version of iOS on their iPhone 3* phones - majorly slow is what I've heard.

While there is _some_ truth to Android not being as open as Google would lay claim to, it's certainly more open than iOS is, and when it comes t getting an app out, Android is the platform benchmark for letting anyone release an app. Apple's a joke in this area. I don't know how app distribution works on Blackberry/Windows Phone platforms, though.

You can not only release your own app on your own website, you can actually open your own Android app MARKETPLACE. Sorry, but that's a level of openness Apple can't and won't compete with.

has arguably the most arbitrary and capricious process for vetting the applications produced for its platform of any platform provider around?

Seriously, my God man, it takes balls so big you need to be checked for testicular cancer to have Apple's track record in dealing with iPhone developers to get on Google's case here.

Sure, maybe the Android platform will end up truly and badly fragmented, but it is not there yet. Furthermore, at least there is always the option of people creating their custom images and processes for helping end users get around vendor crap.

I'm surprised fragmentation is his choice of argument against Android. There are several things iOS does better than Android, but it's getting harder and harder to develop for iOS because of fragmentation. Hell, it used to be called iPhone OS, not iOS, but now you have to make sure your code works on previous generation iPhones, the 4's retina display, the iPad, and the iPod Touch. Resolution differences, support for multitasking, and camera differences are all getting more difficult to manage!

"Folks have been saying your platform seems a bit proprietary and closed.""Hey, how about them White Sox?""Your platform might be proprietary and closed.""Yeah, well so is your mother!""Your platform is proprietary and closed.""Oh yeah? Well, you just must not like having a good experience with your phone."

The problem is that all the more reasonable responses might paint them into a corner where they have to offer an option for a sandbox for a more open use of their platform - and their strategy precludes that as an option. So, like with elections where offering a valid option to voters is too risky (to your various monied interests), insulting the other option becomes the rule of the day.

Wow, sounds similar to Nintendo's stance when Sony came out with the Playstation. Nintendo has a very tough hoop to jump through to get a game on their systems, while Sony has a pretty cheap license. Nintendo was first, and had a tight grip on the market until Sony's loose market PS came into town and dominated. The iPhone is like Nintendo in this sense; first of the new breed, and widely accepted. However, Android is quickly becoming a real threat to the market dominance that iPhone has.

His choice of words "fragmented" and "Integrated" are cleverly chosen word associations that he hopes sway you.

Funny that he took the complete opposite stance on Flash. He claimed it was "Closed" and dead... and would not be allowed on the iPhone... which here he admits is closed itself... or in his clever wording "Integrated".

I think the real difference is "just work" vs "just work the way I want it to". There is certainly a market for "just work". There are enough people willing to conform their work habits to a device's paradigm to make a device manufacturer a very good living. Apple was successful at this, Microsoft less so, because Apple has an interface that's useful and intuitive and people enjoyed using the device. And Windows Mobile... well, that's a different article.

Jobs seems to have drawn the wrong conclusion from this -- that the primary success of the iphone is because every device works the same. The obvious argument to this is that I don't use every device, I only use the device I own, and it works the same every day. The real success of the iphone is that it provides a better experience. And it truly does. I'm surprised that Jobs appears to have forgotten this.

Android also provides a better experience, with the added wrinkle that you can choose the experience you want by choosing a different device and/or customizing the device you have. To people who want to bend a device to their workflow, instead of bending their workflow to a device, this has considerable appeal.

I think what Apple is missing out on is the customizable aspect of personal devices. And before you say it, this is not a nerd only thing. My 16 year old daughter reports that android is becoming more popular with her circle of friends partly because they *are* different (or can be made different) instead of everything having the exact same device with the exact same interface running the exact same apps. (Daughter turned down the iPhone for a Galaxy S and hasn't touched her iPod Touch since she got it.)

Jobs can continue to rant about conformity, fanbois and people who genuinely want a device that "just works" will continue to buy his devices, and he'll do really well. For the rest of us, there's Android.

But.... Listening to Jobs rave about everyone using exactly the same device, I can't help but flash back to that original Mac commercial in 1984. Walt Kelly was right.

Anyone who uses PlaysForSure as an example of an "Open" technology is spewing random bullshit with NOTHING to back it up... I'll get more information from fldksjc;jlssdljl than such random baseless claims.

PlaysForSure failed because it was a fundamentally closed technology, designed with the express purpose of closing down the devices it was installed on. Being closed doesn't work unless you have major market share (which Apple does in the music realm.)

Jobs never does stuff like this. He is very worried. He must have gotten a peak the latest Android growth figures. It's not slowing or even staying the same, it's exploding at a rate Apple can't match on several fronts. Manufacturing alone has to be the biggest worry. They just can't match the output of HTC, Samsung, and Motorola who are all spitting them out as fast as they can. That doesn't even scratch the surface. With all these smartphones coming out, you are going to be able to buy them for next to nothing or even get them free. Apple doesn't want any part of that, but it's coming.

The problem isn't with Google though - if you have an open platform it's bound to become fragmented. I've got 3 versions of Python installed on my PC because different Apps need different versions of it. Do I blame Python for this mess? Absolutely not, I blame the developers because of it.

"Android is very fragmented. Many Android [manufacturers], including the two largest, HTC and Motorola, install proprietary user interfaces to differentiate themselves from the commodity Android experience. The user's left to figure it out. Compare this to iPhone, where every handset works the same."

Well exactly, Jobs, the problem is with HTC and Motorola all wanting their own interface to seperate them from the Android experience (meaning, forcing the fragmentation to happen) instead of just going with the latest And

With all due respect to Ghandi, that quote always annoyed me. For every 1 person in that quote whose last line was "Then you win" there are 10 more who have to substitute "Then you get your ass kicked".